GT Sport - Trailers, Videos and Screenshots

  • Thread starter sk8er913
  • 17,667 comments
  • 2,114,236 views
Why isn't that a good sign?
Its an indicator that they are focusing the PS4s processing power to graphics. Which means less power for stable FPS and smooth gameplay and it could possibly lead to frame drops and screen tearing like the PS3 had. I don't want a "look how real this looks in this screenshot" I want it to feel real in every aspect; not just photomode, I don't mind if the graphics are double PS3 quality, because I understand why they do it, better visual realism and thats a good thing. But I hope that they have improved other aspects of the game MORE than they improved graphics, like the tire model maybe; or a new suspension model with more variables, more cars on a grid would be nice to; maybe 24 or 32.

[/end rant]

:lol: wasn't expecting to rant about that, but I do have a very valid point... its the reason why quite a large margin of people didn't like GT5 and GT6.
 
Why couldn't there be more polygons in the first place??

It's not that there couldn't, it's that there shouldn't. The cars don't need more polys. What needs more polys is the tracks and surrounds, and the rest of the graphical power should be going into getting a stable framerate and boosting the other visual effects to appropriate levels. The rain and wet surfaces need a big boost, and the lighting at night does too.

The cars are the last thing they should be improving. (Apart from the standards, obviously.)

But it's an ingame shot versus a trailer shot, and I don't think what PD is using in their trailers at this point is strictly representative of what the final ingame will look like. It's hardly cause for alarm yet.
 
Its an indicator that they are focusing the PS4s processing power to graphics. Which means less power for stable FPS and smooth gameplay and it could possibly lead to frame drops and screen tearing like the PS3 had. I don't want a "look how real this looks in this screenshot" I want it to feel real in every aspect; not just photomode, I don't mind if the graphics are double PS3 quality, because I understand why they do it, better visual realism and thats a good thing. But I hope that they have improved other aspects of the game MORE than they improved graphics, like the tire model maybe; or a new suspension model with more variables, more cars on a grid would be nice to; maybe 24 or 32.

[/end rant]

:lol: wasn't expecting to rant about that, but I do have a very valid point... its the reason why quite a large margin of people didn't like GT5 and GT6.

I understand your concern, but the trailer doesn't indicate anything other than that they do high resolution models, which isn't exactly something new. The resolution of their models have increased gradually ever since GT5 Prologue.

As for frame drops, that is probably more closely related to the lighting and the screen resolution rather than the resolution of the models, especially since the model resolution in GT5 and GT6 is lower when racing than when you're taking photos or using the gallery view. With the adaptive tesselation models in GT6 it even varies within the same race, depending on how demanding the surroundings are.
 
New "video"

I think this was posted on page 54.

Edit Oops treed.

It's not that there couldn't, it's that there shouldn't. The cars don't need more polys. What needs more polys is the tracks and surrounds, and the rest of the graphical power should be going into getting a stable framerate and boosting the other visual effects to appropriate levels. The rain and wet surfaces need a big boost, and the lighting at night does too.

The cars are the last thing they should be improving. (Apart from the standards, obviously.)

But it's an ingame shot versus a trailer shot, and I don't think what PD is using in their trailers at this point is strictly representative of what the final ingame will look like. It's hardly cause for alarm yet.
It's very safe to assume that they are exact same models though.

Btw good job at redelivering what I said, you explained it well.
 
Last edited:
It's very safe to assume that they are exact same models though.

Maybe, but it doesn't mean that it's representative of what you'll see when racing. Photomode has been and always will be a tool for them to create spectacular looking bullshots and label them as "in-game" without being pulled up for dishonesty in advertising.

Whatever they do with photomode, I wouldn't use that to read too much into what the in-game graphics will look like. Photomode is designed specifically to be graphical wankery. Racing models have always been of a lower quality than photomode, and I don't see that they'd bother changing that now.
 
222jrsfl.gif

Another comparison between GT6 and GTSport.
Can I just point out that the difference is even more amazing once you look closer:

Gt6

image.jpg


Gt sport

image.jpg


:drool::drool::drool:
 
It would seem that people are resolute about hyping themselves up, even though we know that Polyphony bull:censored:s a lot in their trailers.

I'm out. Y'all can wind yourselves up all you want. In a couple of weeks hopefully we'll have some actual in-game stuff to look at, and then people can sensibly start making comparisons.

This 🤬 right here is like seeing a hamburger commercial and getting excited about how delicious it looks, when you know damn well that while it will look similar there's no way on God's green earth that it's going to be the same.
 
You got yourself worked up over nothing. I don't interpret his thoughts as any form of hype, just (slightly misinformed) speculation.

But, indeed, let's wait for actual in-game footage before making any serious comparisons.
Who's misinformed? Its an official image.

It would seem that people are resolute about hyping themselves up, even though we know that Polyphony bull:censored:s a lot in their trailers.

I'm out. Y'all can wind yourselves up all you want. In a couple of weeks hopefully we'll have some actual in-game stuff to look at, and then people can sensibly start making comparisons.

This 🤬 right here is like seeing a hamburger commercial and getting excited about how delicious it looks, when you know damn well that while it will look similar there's no way on God's green earth that it's going to be the same.
I don't see anyone hyping up anything.
 
It would seem that people are resolute about hyping themselves up, even though we know that Polyphony bull:censored:s a lot in their trailers.

I'm out. Y'all can wind yourselves up all you want. In a couple of weeks hopefully we'll have some actual in-game stuff to look at, and then people can sensibly start making comparisons.

This 🤬 right here is like seeing a hamburger commercial and getting excited about how delicious it looks, when you know damn well that while it will look similar there's no way on God's green earth that it's going to be the same.
:lol: that sums it up perfectly.
Aaand now I'm hungry :drool:
 
Not even close.

GT1 was late 1997/early 1998, right?

Obviously you're not familiar with the early work of David Kaemmer and Geoff Crammond. Kaemmer and Papyrus started with Indy 500 in 1989, starting a series of simulation Indy and NASCAR games. Crammond and Microprose released F1 Grand Prix in 1992, starting another important simulation series, the Grand Prix series.

So let's put aside the claim that GT1 was the first racing game to be considered a simulator. That's just false.

Gran Turismo was the first serious simulation on a console, and the first to achieve major commercial success. But go back and play something like GPL which released at almost the same time, and you'll realise how limited it's claim to simulation was. It was decent, but not great. Not entirely unlike GT6 today. It's a passable simulation but severely limited in many areas.

The thing about GT1 is that it feels remarkably similar to drive to many games that are labelled arcade or semi-sim today. It was hard to tell at the time because real simulations weren't as widespread and easily available as they are today. Today, it's easy to pick up Assetto Corsa or rF2 or iRacing and see how nuanced their physical models are over what GT provides. Way back when, it's likely that Gran Turismo was all people had or would see, and so they assumed (like you do) that it was the pinnacle of simulation.

GT1 isn't much of a simulator, because it's built along the same lines as the semi-sim and arcade games of today. It does the same trick that games like NFS: Shift, GRID, and Driveclub do. It provides a believable and authentic feeling experience without necessarily getting all anal about being accurate. I happen to enjoy those sorts of games and I think early Gran Turismos did it very well, finding a nice balance between simulation and pure fun.

But I don't fool myself by saying that GT1 was a simulation comparable with the best of the time, because it wasn't. And it certainly wasn't the first by any stretch of the imagination. Which is why I say it wasn't much of a simulator. In some senses it was, but in many senses it wasn't and it's simulation certainly wasn't it's greatest strength.
Would F1 World Gran Prix be one of the games that Crammond and Microprose released/developed?
 
Back